CMPO to ask Charter Court to rule on legality of ongoing protests

[webfact]

CMPO to ask Charter Court to rule on legality of ongoing protests

BANGKOK, 1 March 2014 (NNT) – The Center for Maintaining Peace and Order (CMPO) is prepared to submit a petition to the Constitution Court, asking it to deliberate on whether or not the ongoing anti-government protests are legal.

The CMPO, under the caretaker government led by Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, made known that it would ask for the Charter Court’s judgement whether the current political activities should be allowed to go on. According to CMPO secretary-general and Department of Special Investigation chief Tarit Pengdith, documents including video and audio evidence will also be presented to the court for the legal interpretation.

The Civil Court earlier ruled that anti-government activities of the People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) were legal if carried out in peace.

The CMPO secretary-general further revealed that the court recently approved of a certain amount of budget to be spent on peacekeeping operations. However, the budget will have to be given a nod by the Election Commission (EC) as well.


-- NNT 2014-03-01

[Melyn]

The CMPO will attend wearing their new fashion accessory - the sor por por lanna bandana

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[TVGerry]

Red shirts going to go surround the courts now until they say the protest are illegal?

[Melyn]

Red shirts going to go surround the courts now until they say the protest are illegal?

Indeed, burning coffins and effigies if people who disagree with them

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[PatOngo]

I heard they will change their name to the "Chiang Mai Post Office".

[icommunity]

The Charter Court will say - too late, they are now in hiding at Lumpini Park. The Park is BMA responsibility, not yours. BMA can maintain law and order there.

[chainarong]

Generally you need a permit to protest, so super sluth knows full well what the situation is , although the court has made some interesting judgements lately.

[bigbamboo]

Why bother to ask the courts? If they don't like the answer they'll ignore it anyway.

Edited March 1, 2014 by bigbamboo

[Scamper]

Yet again, the CMPO engage in their favourite sport - refiling appeals on rulings they don't like. A number of things make the CMPO's refiling request much more difficult this time. They are :

1. The Constitutional Court, the Civil Court, and the Criminal Court have already ruled that the PDRC protests are constitutional.

2. The PDRC has now retreated to Lumpini Park.

3. There are now two protests in Bangkok - the UDD and the PDRC. Naturally, the CMPO didn't specify them, but ...

4. The UDD protests are directly targeting the independent agencies, and the Civil Court. Not only that, but they are cementing the NACC away from the world. The Constitutional Court will take any action which directly threatens the process of constitutional law very seriously.

Chalerm is really boxed in this time, because it is the UDD which will become a continual embarrassment and impediment to him. He can hardly claim that the PDRC's rally at Lumpini Park is in any way an impediment in society while the UDD covers the NACC with cement.

[mrtoad]

Lets ask the courts about the legality of CMPO

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Kan Win]

1. The Constitutional Court, the Civil Court, and the Criminal Court have already ruled that the PDRC protests are constitutional.

1. Whilst the Thais and our freedom of movement is/was blocked on the roads of Bangkok and other areas of Thailand before and now by peaceful protester are they constitutional then?

2. The right to VOTE was BOLOCKED in some areas of Bangkok and Thailand are these also constitutional then?

3. Is, the right to work were you are permitted under ones Work Permit and denied access as per your Work Permit is that also constitutional then?

I would really like these protesters to try and stop ME from going to my office near the new airport.

Win

Edited March 1, 2014 by Kan Win

[Costas2008]

Kan Win, on 01 Mar 2014 - 18:08, said:

Scamper, on 01 Mar 2014 - 17:14, said:

1. The Constitutional Court, the Civil Court, and the Criminal Court have already ruled that the PDRC protests are constitutional.

I would really like these protesters to try and stop ME from going to my office near the new airport.

Win

What are you going to do? Fart...... in their general direction?

[ratcatcher]

1. The Constitutional Court, the Civil Court, and the Criminal Court have already ruled that the PDRC protests are constitutional.

1. Whilst the Thais and our freedom of movement is/was blocked on the roads of Bangkok and other areas of Thailand before and now by peaceful protester are they constitutional then?

2. The right to VOTE was BOLOCKED in some areas of Bangkok and Thailand are these also constitutional then?

3. Is, the right to work were you are permitted under ones Work Permit and denied access as per your Work Permit is that also constitutional then?

I would really like these protesters to try and stop ME from going to my office near the new airport.

Win

2. The right to VOTE was BOLOCKED in some areas of Bangkok and Thailand are these also constitutional then?

Indeed it was sir, and how.

It's still all a load of Bolocks until the legitimacy of the caretakers is determined.

[Tatsujin]

Jeez ... how many Courts are there left for them to ask? Don't they respect the judgements of ANY of them?

[Mudcrab]

1. The Constitutional Court, the Civil Court, and the Criminal Court have already ruled that the PDRC protests are constitutional.

1. Whilst the Thais and our freedom of movement is/was blocked on the roads of Bangkok and other areas of Thailand before and now by peaceful protester are they constitutional then?

2. The right to VOTE was BOLOCKED in some areas of Bangkok and Thailand are these also constitutional then?

3. Is, the right to work were you are permitted under ones Work Permit and denied access as per your Work Permit is that also constitutional then?

I would really like these protesters to try and stop ME from going to my office near the new airport.

Win

Maybe ask the Reds the same question. Might be a different attitude from you then.

[Mudcrab]

1. The Constitutional Court, the Civil Court, and the Criminal Court have already ruled that the PDRC protests are constitutional.

1. Whilst the Thais and our freedom of movement is/was blocked on the roads of Bangkok and other areas of Thailand before and now by peaceful protester are they constitutional then?

2. The right to VOTE was BOLOCKED in some areas of Bangkok and Thailand are these also constitutional then?

3. Is, the right to work were you are permitted under ones Work Permit and denied access as per your Work Permit is that also constitutional then?

I would really like these protesters to try and stop ME from going to my office near the new airport.

Win

Which is the "New airport" ? Runawaytodubaistoosoonercashachequeandaquickboomboomme"? Man you are one tough hombre.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Jeez ... how many Courts are there left for them to ask? Don't they respect the judgements of ANY of them?

I think the NNT announcement here is screwed up a bit. You'd think the government would know better.

The headline and the 2nd pgh talk about a "Charter Court," but then the lead paragraph uses the term "Constitution Court." AFAIK, there is no "Charter Court," but there is a "Constitutional Court."

And I believe, the issue of the legality of the PCAD protests has already been affirmed by the Constitution Court in some prior ruling, though it may have been the regular Civil Court instead/as well. Not sure on that point.

Edited March 1, 2014 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Tatsujin]

Jeez ... how many Courts are there left for them to ask? Don't they respect the judgements of ANY of them?

I think the NNT announcement here is screwed up a bit. You'd think the government would know better.

The headline and the 2nd pgh talk about a "Charter Court," but then the lead paragraph uses the term "Constitution Court." AFAIK, there is no "Charter Court," but there is a "Constitutional Court."

And I believe, the issue of the legality of the PCAD protests has already been affirmed by the Constitution Court in some prior ruling, though it may have been the regular Civil Court instead/as well. Not sure on that point.

I believe Charter and Constitution Court are the same thing, and they along with Civil Court have already deemed the protests peaceful and lawful.

I'm guessing that CMPO will claim the grenade attacks last week now mean that they are not now peaceful and therefore they will ask the CC to rule again.

They should also be asking for permission to remove the peaceful UDD protestors at the same time as they are also breaking the law (if one is, both are).

Bit of a last ditch effort by the CMPO/PT however considering that the entire election will be invalidated in a few more days and they will all have to step down.

With impeachments to follow, PT as a party and the Politicians themselves are not in a great place right now.

Can't wait for it all to end.

[Mister Fixit]

1. The Constitutional Court, the Civil Court, and the Criminal Court have already ruled that the PDRC protests are constitutional.

1. Whilst the Thais and our freedom of movement is/was blocked on the roads of Bangkok and other areas of Thailand before and now by peaceful protester are they constitutional then?

2. The right to VOTE was BOLOCKED in some areas of Bangkok and Thailand are these also constitutional then?

3. Is, the right to work were you are permitted under ones Work Permit and denied access as per your Work Permit is that also constitutional then?

I would really like these protesters to try and stop ME from going to my office near the new airport.

Win

Er, be careful of your spelling in No. 2 above, mate ...

[Crushdepth]

1. The Constitutional Court, the Civil Court, and the Criminal Court have already ruled that the PDRC protests are constitutional.

1. Whilst the Thais and our freedom of movement is/was blocked on the roads of Bangkok and other areas of Thailand before and now by peaceful protester are they constitutional then?

2. The right to VOTE was BOLOCKED in some areas of Bangkok and Thailand are these also constitutional then?

3. Is, the right to work were you are permitted under ones Work Permit and denied access as per your Work Permit is that also constitutional then?

I would really like these protesters to try and stop ME from going to my office near the new airport.

Win

The correct spelling is "bollocksed".

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[tomacht8]

The CMPO secretary-general further revealed that the court recently approved of a certain amount of budget to be spent on peacekeeping operations. However, the budget will have to be given a nod by the Election Commission (EC) as well.

If a state institution works for one side(group) only, then: no money.

That would be fair.
If state funds are spent, all Thais should have a benefit equally.
However, the benefits of this institution: CMPO is questionable.
High cost - low benefit is always bad.

[mrtoad]

1. The Constitutional Court, the Civil Court, and the Criminal Court have already ruled that the PDRC protests are constitutional.

1. Whilst the Thais and our freedom of movement is/was blocked on the roads of Bangkok and other areas of Thailand before and now by peaceful protester are they constitutional then?

2. The right to VOTE was BOLOCKED in some areas of Bangkok and Thailand are these also constitutional then?

3. Is, the right to work were you are permitted under ones Work Permit and denied access as per your Work Permit is that also constitutional then?

I would really like these protesters to try and stop ME from going to my office near the new airport.

Win

What a load of bolocks.

[TheClog]

The correct thing to do to get the remnants of Suthep's backers armed violent mob off the streets, and allow normal folk to go about their business.

Hopefully the judiciary will take note of John Kerry's recent targeted comments

[rubl]

The Charter Court will say - too late, they are now in hiding at Lumpini Park. The Park is BMA responsibility, not yours. BMA can maintain law and order there.

Your understanding of law, constitution and procedures seem somewhat limited. Whether the antigovernment protesters are in the open or in a more secluded space in Lumpini Park has no relation to the ruling the CMPO asks for.

[jennywren]

The Courts will have to decide whether what they judge will be accepted or if it will light the final touch paper. Or if they rule toe protests legal, then the courts will be shut down as the gov agencies are.. We saw it last week.

too much out in the open for them to pull of a Judicial coup and who is going to enforce it?

Interesting dilemas for them. Suthep is finished and the Army plainly don't want to help him this time. Army just trying to keep violence down so they can say there is not enough for a coup.

QUite clear they do not want Suthep back in control.. They had to work with him in the past!!